When I was getting married the pastor that was doing the job told us that after being married if you both feel you give in to the other more than they, you are at 50% because if you give in 50% it will feel like you are giving in all the time.I don't do hysterical or historical.
Gotta admit that I got a good one. She had a 1mm fuse with a big explosion 38 years ago, but she mellowed. We probably had our last knock-down-drag-out 15-20 years ago. We have been married long enough now that pretty much everything that can be fought out has been settled - mostly in her favor, of course.
My policy has been to let her have her way about 99% of the time. My kids watched this and knew it as they grew up. Once when they were teens it was one of those 1% days and I wasn't backing down. The kids are at the dinner table and wife is cooking. She says, "Oh, you always have to have your way." I looked at my kids and they did giant eye rolls. Lol.
I asked her a few years ago on our 35th anniversary if she wanted to sign up for another 35 years. She said, "We might as well go on to the bitter end."
Is it routine for political attacks on Supreme Court Justices?
- Thread starter Yappi
- Start date
winbypin
Well-known member
It probably should never have happened to begin with. This was a correction.
bob99
Well-known member
So you are saying the Supreme Court job is to interpret according which way they lean politically. Both parties is their way or the highway. Take off the blinders.
bob99
Well-known member
There are just as many who just vote R. It is just the way it is. I have always claimed of being a right leaning Independent as far as policies. Which probably makes me more of a right leaning RINO Independent. Apparently that is just as bad as being a democrat to some people.
bob99
Well-known member
I am fine having this determined at the state level as long as it is an honest vote by the citizens. It is not a correction if the majority disagree with it.
bob99
Well-known member
I can relate down to the kids giant eye rollsI don't do hysterical or historical.
Gotta admit that I got a good one. She had a 1mm fuse with a big explosion 38 years ago, but she mellowed. We probably had our last knock-down-drag-out 15-20 years ago. We have been married long enough now that pretty much everything that can be fought out has been settled - mostly in her favor, of course.
My policy has been to let her have her way about 99% of the time. My kids watched this and knew it as they grew up. Once when they were teens it was one of those 1% days and I wasn't backing down. The kids are at the dinner table and wife is cooking. She says, "Oh, you always have to have your way." I looked at my kids and they did giant eye rolls. Lol.
I asked her a few years ago on our 35th anniversary if she wanted to sign up for another 35 years. She said, "We might as well go on to the bitter end."
If you have evidence that either was recruited by Trump please post it.
Liar.
bob99
Well-known member
winbypin
Well-known member
Majority of who disagrees with what?
bob99
Well-known member
A total ban on abortion with no allowance for special circumstances.
bob99
Well-known member
I am not sure if the majority of voters want a ban at all.
winbypin
Well-known member
Special circumstances I am fine with but as you said, let the citizens decide.
winbypin
Well-known member
Then we will find out at the state level.
bob99
Well-known member
As it should be. I have been stating that if the Supreme Court had not turned into a right leaning body R VS W would never have been changed.
bob99
Well-known member
So you know more personally about Walker than his own son? You are lying. Again.
Last edited:
bob99
Well-known member
You should write articles for national newscast. You claim to know more than any of them.
Raphael Warnock beats Trump pick Herschel Walker in …
"It also marks a major loss for former President Donald Trump, who had championed Walker and campaigned for him. Trump was already under fire from some Republicans after many of his handpicked candidates underperformed in key midterm races, helping Democrats keep majority control of the upper chamber of Congress."
Trump's Hand-Picked Candidates Lose Winnable Senate …
Former US president Donald Trump's hand-picked candidates lost winnable Senate races in Pennsylvania and New Hampshire, and could yet fall in Arizona and Nevada.
cabezadecaballo
Well-known member
Here’s the thing. Organic diversity is great, and it will happen on its own, as long as we don’t just keep nominating Harvard products to SCOTUS. Then it’s a monolithic wall of institutionalism with no regard for the human beings that the institutions pretend to serve. That’s where the Bush-y RINOs have been taking us.
We know full well that no Democrat President would ever even consider ACB. Ever.
We also know that the Republicans selected her in part to check the Ruthie box.
You Democrats posited a scenario in the media, from outside of power, in which retiring justices were now supposed to be replaced by the same “flavor” of justice. Obama’s media straight lied about Merrick Garland, trying to sell along those lines, and his tenure at has proven that to be a complete joke.
Then you guys used the Eric Holder voting model in enough states to put a demented old Democrat goat in as president, and he wiped his asz with that notion in replacing Justice Breyer.
post Vietnam era, all of academia began to slowly turn into a biased liberal joke, and notions of elite jurisprudence have suffered for it. This is as much responsible for the politicization of the court as was the Democrats abusing Bork and Thomas. Grandstanding for the confirmation process. Then you stooped all the way to personal destruction with Kavanaugh. You do know your grandparents would be ashamed of you if you did not speak out against it, right ?
This stems from defying the will of the people and being unable to legislate your will. The Democrats back door progressivism through the judiciary, and it needs to stop.
No, pubs don't want that. Ask Kansas. You mean let representatives decide. And hope that gerrymandering and incumbency rates are enough to retain power. Then afterwards while you're at it raise the threshold that allows individual citizens to amend their constitutions. That is what pubs mean by letting citizens decide.
cabezadecaballo
Well-known member
Show me that happening bob. Go ahead, I’d like to see your example. You’ve got nothing do you ?
cabezadecaballo
Well-known member
That’s only a realistic view if you completely discount the effect of mail in ballots, or abortion and student loan issues along side of same day registration on a campus push. You really don’t understand what’s happening to you ?
cabezadecaballo
Well-known member
Well, maybe you should take the time to get up to speed. Otherwise you end up posting like Brian with better spelling.
I was going to say “with spellcheck enabled”, but I don’t know if Brian gives spellcheck enough to work with…
cabezadecaballo
Well-known member
The left already control the Senate last session. The only difference now is that both mansion and cinema would be needed to offset camel toe
cabezadecaballo
Well-known member
Regardless of whether or not you are willing to acknowledge it, the Democrat party almost always takes things to a new low on everything having to do with partisan engagement.
you can stuff your “both sides are just as bad” nonsense.
don’t even start.
ProV1
Well-known member
And they can fire up an investigation into Javanka any time they want as payback for any Hunter BS that McCarthy dishes out. It's awesome.
cabezadecaballo
Well-known member
Bring it.
Edit- as I contemplate your post further, I really wonder how the Senate side can make a deal with McCarthy to back off of the Bidens by backing off of Jared Kushner‘s wife. I am just trying to think what McCarthy would want to give up in order to help Donald Trump in a scenario with little shot of wearing that jacket for harming Trump
This is like Bre’r Rabbit’s briar patch territory for most of the Republican party. “Oh no don’t investigate Ivanka!! that will look just terrible alongside of Trump’s tax returns!”
Good times. Go DeSantis
Last edited by a moderator:
bob99
Well-known member
Roe vs. Wade would have never been overturned if the court hadn't change to a right leaning body. All the years the court was left leaning Roe vs Wade was off limits. Wasn't that the purpose to nominate like minded candidates once the right was in power to make changes?
bob99
Well-known member
I saw a Republican talking head who claimed the right's attack on mail in and early voting is hurting the right"s voter turnout. Voting is a right. Any attempt to refuse the public of that right is wrong. It is unrealistic if you see the bogeyman around every corner. You are really narrow-minded Cabe. Being paranoid isn't a good look for you. You are better than that.
I remember when you took a sabbatical from Yappi. Was that your way of deBrian your posts and getting back up to speed
And Schmuck Schumer can afford to lose the support of one of them. The left can now control the numbers on committees. Some what of a big deal don't you think?
Please child. Far right far left, it makes no difference. Both are party before country. Both are self preservation before all else. If you think serving the wants and needs of the general public is a top priority of either party, I have a nice patch of swampland to sell you. Trust me.
cabezadecaballo
Well-known member
Roe was overturned because it was a horrible decision made out of political cowardice, and the right argument against it was finally made. That is all, bob.
Now, if you want to argue that 70's era Democrat partisan judicial activism in a more moral time created an absurd extension of "right to privacy" in the original Roe v Wade that no longer applies, THAT dog will hunt.
Last edited: